 His mother may be queen of the actual highway but John McCain has run into some difficulties on the information equivalent. The Huffington Post recently posted a video in which he confessed to being technologically challenged.
I'm an illiterate that has to rely on my wife for all the assistance that I can get.
Now Matthew Yglesias weighs in. Does the inability to use a computer in today's society speak to a broader problem? He thinks it might: Do you have to use a computer to understand how it shapes the country? I think you might. If we had a president who didn't know how to drive a car, that would probably strike us as pretty odd.
Alice Fishburn
 Apparently slowing down is not in the McCain family genes.
The candidate's 96-year-old mother recently added yet another ticket to her extensive collection of speeding fines.
The Sleuth reports: Did the cop know who she was? "Well, it was written right there," she said, referring to her driver's license. "But they'll sure know who I am when he becomes president."
Full speed ahead, then?
Forget about ties, chocolates or a hastily scribbled card. When it comes to Father's Day gifts for presidential candidates, it's the vote of confidence that says it all.
At least in the case of Meghan McCain who changed her voter registration from Independent to Republican this weekend. She explains the reasoning on her blog: This morning, I went to the State Capitol Executive Building in Phoenix with Mom and re-registered as a Republican. I did this as a symbol of my commitment to my dad and to represent the faith I have in his ability to be an effective leader for our country and to grow and strengthen the Republican party when he is elected President of the United States. Happy Father's Day, Dad!
Alice Fishburn
The Caucus looks at the case for and against a one-term presidency.
It's Condi.
 Did John McCain vote for George Bush?
Well that's not what he told Josh and Toby from The West Wing. Seriously.
The blogger and socialite Arianna Huffington posted on her blog a few days ago that at a small dinner party in LA just after the 2000 election McCain told startled guests that he didn't like Bush, didn't trust him and hadn't voted for him.
At this stage of proceedings I should think this was a good story for McCain. His people, however, have denied it vehemently. His close aide Mark Salter had this to say about Ms Huffington: She’s a flake and a poser and an attention-seeking diva
Enter Josh Lyman and Toby Ziegler.
For it turns out that actors Bradley Whitford (Josh) and Richard Schiff (Toby) were both present at the dinner and, at the request of Arianna Huffington, have issued statements.
 Here's Josh:
McCain was just sort of going off on how much he disliked Bush and the horrible things that the Bush campaign had done to his family in South Carolina, and his exasperation with Bush about his ridiculous tax cuts and he really wanted to talk to him about it, but he said the guy doesn’t have the concentration, and you talk for 10 minutes and then the guy wants to talk about baseball,” Mr. Whitford said.
Another guest then asked Mr. McCain, Mr. Whitford recalled, whether he had voted for Mr. Bush. “And he put his finger in front of his mouth and mouthed, ‘No way,’ ” Mr. Whitford said.
 And here's Toby:
Someone asked, ‘What do you think of Bush?’ ” Mr. Schiff recalled. “My recollection, and I have to qualify this, because I’m not 100 percent sure he used this word, but my recollection is that McCain said that Bush was dangerous and he didn’t trust him.
Then this person said, ‘Why did you support him?’ And McCain said, ‘It was my obligation as a Republican to support the Republican candidate.’ And the person said, ‘Did you vote for him?’ And McCain said, ‘No.’
Now Mark Salter has replied to the actor with this statement: He voted for George Bush; I know it for dead certitude
This is not, however, a denial.
Josh and Toby are not saying that McCain did not vote for Bush. How could they possibly know that? They are saying that he told a starry liberal Hollywood dinner party, who wanted him to dislike Bush, that he didn't vote for Bush, which is a quite different thing.
Strangely enough, McCain emerges stronger from the Huffington version of the story than from the denial issued by Salter.
 One of the Senators on our Republican VP list is already sure of some substantial McCain support.
Here's Meghan McCain, of Blogette fame, on Joe Lieberman: Yesterday, we flew from DC to Chicago where Dad made a speech to the National Restaurant Association with my favorite Senator (other than Dad), Joe Lieberman. Seriously, he's the nicest guy ever.
Thanks to our readers for their suggestions on our top ten picks for McCain's Vice President.
It was difficult to narrow it down to ten, because McCain has got a big field to pick from. But in the end we've taken out Colin Powell and Mike Huckabee because we think they're unlikely.
In their place we've added Carly Fiorina, a woman who could provide the economics knowledge that McCain lacks and Senator Lindsey Graham, a well-liked Southerner and old friend of McCain's.
McCain needs to pick his partner very carefully. A heartbeat away from the Presidency matters more when the heart in question will be 72 at the time of the inauguration. Here are some of the suggestions:
 1) Tim Pawlenty
The Governor of Minnesota is at the top of many pundit's lists. The Springsteen fan likes to emphasise his working class roots and has managed to win twice in a traditionally Democratic state. He's renowned for his personal and rhetorical skills and liked by left and right. The one to watch.
2) Joe Lieberman
Connecticut Senator Lieberman bridges the political divide. A former Democrat, he still supports most of their policies but is also in favour of the Iraq war. He's made presidential and vice-presidential runs before and is an old friend of John McCain. The two Senators were together on the recent UK trip of McCain's and were frequently see yukking it up. But age is a big, big issue. Lieberman is 66. Together the ticket will add up to 138 years of experience.
3) Mitt Romney
McCain and Romney fell out several times during the Republican nomination race. But they've been cozying up of late and Romney has been spotted fundraising with McCain in the west. The worse the economy gets, the higher his chances. His impeccable financial credentials are his strongest card. He would make McCain seem more conservative (probably - Romney is, ahem, flexible). This would help with the base but would it put off independents?
4)  Condoleezza Rice
The dream ticket for some. The nightmare for others. The Secretary of State's race and gender would boost the Republican argument that they're not just a party for white men. Condi speaks five languages and would provide some much-needed foreign policy clout. The odds of selecting her might have been higher if Clinton had wrapped up the Democratic nomination. But no-one would sneeze at this option. So what's not to like (if you are a Republican)? In a word - Bush. McCain's presidential bid won't fly if he is tethered to the President. And wouldn't Condi do just that?
5) Charlie Crist
Also a popular option. The popular Governor of Florida might bring the swing-state with him, and he's not even a Bush. The Times has written before about the likelihood of him making VP. He appeals to both independents and more conservative Republicans. A possible snag? He's single and has been forced to repeatedly defend his sexuality. Or is that a snag?
6) Bobby Jindal
The Governor of Louisiana, his name's cropped up several times recently. He's made waves with ethics reform in his homestate. The child of Indian immigrants, he'd add some diversity to the ticket and, at just 36, years old, he's half McCain's age. He also has a strong background in healthcare.
 7) Sarah Palin
A former Miss Congeniality, the young Alaska senator has made quite a splash. The first female governor of her state, she might help bring women into the fold. And her strong support of family values and pro-life views will appeal to Republican voters who might be alienated by McCain's more maverick opinions.
8) Colin Powell
The former Secretary of State is a much-loved and well-respected moderate. But his denouncement of the Iraq mission may make him less appealing to McCain. Another catch? He's advised Barack Obama on foreign policy and praised him heavily in the past. An endorsement isn't out of the question.
9) Haley Barbour
The Governor of Mississippi would help secure the South. He's been head of the RNC and no-one could quibble with his conservatism. Knows everyone in politics but there is one large cloud hanging over his head. A series of Katrina-related ethics violations were alleged last summer. McCain might decide to steer clear.
 10) Mike Huckabee:
If he really wants to propitiate the base, McCain should go with Huckabee. The former Arkansas Governor scored surprisingly well during the nomination campaign, taking Ohio, Kansas, Louisiana and West Virginia. And McCain would get two for one. Huckabee's bound to bring celebrity endorser Chuck Norris along for the ride. On the other hand, the guy doesn't even believe in the theory of evolution.
Yesterday John McCain made this striking promise: I will ask Congress to grant me the privilege of coming before both Houses to take questions and address criticism, much the same as the Prime Minister of Great Britain appears regularly before the House of Commons.
Well, I spent five years of my life working week in and week out on Prime Minister's Questions (PMQs), helping prepare both former Prime Minister John Major and then Tory leader, and arch exponent of the PMQ artform, William Hague.
So here, from experience, is what our American friends can expect.
First, it takes a good deal of time. This is a big commitment McCain has made.
If you don't prepare for PMQs you will be roasted alive, whether you are asking or answering the questions. William Hague spent what amounted to about 75 per cent of one working day a week preparing to ask his questions. And senior staff spent even more time than that.
This is the reason why John Major advised Tony Blair to cut the sessions from two a week to just one, which he did immediately he took office. So the burden of PMQs could be eased by being made infrequent, but then a great deal of its force and purpose would be lost.
Second, this time need not be wasted.
The President will need to be briefed on every topic under the sun in order to be prepared. This can be used to hold the rest of the executive to account. The need to produce convincing arguments to all sorts of questions can act as a spur to the whole government. And it can help identify areas where progress is slow.
Third, PMQs provides a timetable for government. The need to answer questions can often speed up events and even drive them.
For instance, Tony Blair moved to force his close friend Peter Mandelson to resign on a Wednesday morning, because he feared that he would find it hard to defend him in the House of Commons later that day. Subsequently things looked a little different - if he had had more time, Mandelson might not have had to go.
Fourth, PMQs are part theatre and you have to work at that.
Much of PMQs is the real stuff - you get real answers, see real weaknesses and learn about real dividing lines. But there is a large vaudeville element. One of my jobs was to help with jokes and if the jokes worked the session was often viewed as a success.
You can't expect to simply wing the jokes - you have to come prepared.
Of course, you might seek to reduce the vaudeville element and make the session more like a committee hearing, but again it would lose a huge part of its force if you did.
Fifth, PMQs provide participants with a strategic dilemma. Do you try to win the exchange or do you try to win over the public?
William Hague famously won his exchanges with Tony Blair - but to no avail, he lost in 2001 in a landslide and had to stand down. Blair, you see, was winning with the public. Voters thought Hague was too much the debater, not enough the statesman.
Yet if you play it too cool, your own side in the room is disappointed and may begin to grumble about you.
Sixth, the details of McCain's idea matter.
The exact steps in the little dance that is PMQs are fundamental to its nature. For instance, the fact that the Leader of the Opposition (the Conservative Party leader) has six questions while the leader of the Liberal Democrats has only two, alters the questions they ask and the impact they make profoundly.
So how many times a month will this session go ahead? Who will be allowed to ask questions? How many will they be allowed to ask? Will the participants be seated or standing? Will the questioners be grouped by party?
Only if he answers these questions will we see the nature of what McCain has in mind.
Here's a video of William Hague talking about PMQs and a PMQs joke which I may or may not have had a hand in.
A new contender for the schmaltziest campaign ad yet award.
It's Mother's Day in America this weekend. And so John McCain's redoubtable 96-year-old mother recounts his birth for the greater public. Cue many maternal compliments, a coupld of heart-warming tales and a sizeable ratings boost. Oh yes, and a rather alarming detail about 27 bottles of Scotch.
Alice Fishburn
In our latest Fora video, Niall Fergusson argues that McCain is the only candidate strong enough to contain Iran. Watch here to find out why:
If you can't see this video, click here
Anyone out there feel comfortable smashing a mirror? Well, then you can sympathise with John McCain's superstitious tendencies. Unless, that is, you are Stephen Colbert.
 John McCain is as American as apple pie. Or as a decorated war hero who likes nothing better than kicking back with a drink and watching the football.
But there's one small technical hitch he still has to face. American he might be. But he was born on the Panama Canal. Might this bar him from becoming President?
Article II of the Constitution reads as follow: No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
McCain, at 71, more than fulfils the age requirement. But is he a 'natural born citizen'? His campaign team are convinced but some still quibble. And the Senate is getting in on the act: After suggestions earlier this year that the issue of the presidential eligibility of Americans born abroad had never been settled, Senator Claire McCaskill, Democrat of Missouri, introduced legislation that would have declared the offspring of military personnel stationed overseas are qualified to be president. (Mr. McCain and several legal scholars believe the matter has already been settled.)
The Senate will decide on a resolution this week. And two lawsuits challenging McCain are already in the works. No-one's taking it seriously right now but McCain must be wistfully humming 'Born in the USA' as he prepares his arguments.
Alice Fishburn
The knives are out. Yet another candidate's spouse has been caught up in a culinary crisis.
We all remember Cookiegate. Back in 2004, it was discovered that Theresa Heinz Kerry's recipe for pumpkin spice cookies in the First Lady bake-off was not her own. Cue national shock.
Now Cindy McCain is in trouble for recipes posted on the website. Her delicious Ahi tuna? Turns out it was copied directly from the Food Network.
But the McCain team has pulled off the unusual coup of standing the standing the heat and getting out of the kitchen. The site pulled down the recipes then sent this email to the Fact Checker (dreaded truth taskmaster of all the candidates). Apparently a web intern added Rachael Ray to our policy team without her knowing it. He was swiftly dealt with and the page is down for revision. Our apologies to Food Network -- but according to our press assistant the passion fruit mousse is really worth trying. PS - If we get a Pinocchio on this one I expect him to be wearing a chef's hat
 Cue one chef Pinocchio and full marks for campaign humour.
Let's just hope that someone's talking Bill Clinton and Michelle Obama through their bake-off biscuits.
Alice Fishburn
Whoops. Here's one slip-up that might come back to haunt John McCain. Even now Rush Limbaugh is probably rubbing his hands with glee...
Alice Fishburn
I can't believe I haven't linked to this blog yet. It comes from John McCain's daughter. She is a Scorpio.
The Democrats lose the limelight today as all eyes focus on the allegation that John McCain had a romantic relationship with a lobbyist. With McCain's team vowing to 'go to war' against the New York Times, the blogosphere is buzzing. You can read a roundup of their opinions over at Across the Pond.
One of the more interesting points comes from Real Clear Politics. Might this story actually help McCain in the long-run? In some quarters, mostly Democratic ones, the Times is the beacon of truth. In others, mostly conservative Republican ones, it is anything but. Running against the "liberal media" has served Republicans well ever since Spiro Agnew helped Richard Nixon to mobilize the "silent majority" against the Eastern establishment
If anyone can imagine a McCain presidency, it's Matt Welch. In this new FORA video he tracks the candidate's progress from hero to loser to comeback kid.
Want to know what a McCain White House might look like? Watch this.
If you can't see this video, click here
When John McCain was at rock bottom, Jay Cost tried to figure out why.
His theory? That you could win the race as a moderate but not as a maverick. The problem with McCain, he suggested, was that you simply didn't know where he would go on an issue.
But it turned out that McCain had a stroke of luck.
There wasn't one other non-maverick contender.
Being the non-maverick contender was Romney's schtick. He was running as the reliable conservative. The problem is that he wasn't. His history meant that he never could be. And even with the support of the National Review and Ann Coulter he couldn't get enough conservatives to trust him.
Does his departure and McCain's impending victory mean that traditional Reagan conservatism is dead?
I don't think so. McCain remains marginally more likely to win than to lose. And if he loses, his maverick departures from orthodoxy will get the blame. A candidate with a better pedigree than Romney will take up the charge.
We may have seen Romney's last stand. We haven't seen the last stand of Ronald Reagan.
 The emergence of John McCain as the Republican frontrunner makes this American election unique.
It looks as if this will be the first election in US history where the nominees of both parties are members of the Senate.
On only two previous occasions has a Senator proceeded directly to the White House - John Kennedy in 1960 and Warren Harding in 1920.
And it has been surprisingly rare for even one Senator to be a candidate in the general election. There was Stephen Douglas in 1860, Barry Goldwater in 1964, George McGovern in 1972 and John Kerry in 2004.
Technically Bob Dole doesn't count because he resigned his seat before the election in 1996.
The traditional theory about this striking feature of US elections? That Senators talk their own legislative language, dry, technical, boring and not emotionally in touch with voters. And that they become part of the Washington machine and vulnerable to an anti-Washington campaign (which interestingly is exactly how Mitt Romney is now planning to go).
You can see both these weaknesses in John McCain. Fortunately for him, he'll be fighting another Senator. And both his potential opponents exhibit the same weaknesses.
Back in September, when John McCain's candidacy was almost uniformly regarded as deader than Dead Jock McDead the winner of the Mister Dead competition, I took issue with the consensus.
I thought he could still be the Republican nominee, a contention (backed by my colleague Gerry Baker) which caused renewed debate about McCain over in the US.
Now I want to go, dangerously, one step further.
I think McCain will be the nominee.
Here are my four reasons. First, he is rising steadily in the polls. And he has been doing this since November and before the Primary season started. His performance in New Hampshire was the result of this long-term steady rise. His lead now is a little bit momentum, but even more long-term trend.
Second, I think that he and Rudy Giuliani are the only Republicans with the remotest chance of winning in a general election. I don't think serious parties choose candidates who they know will lose. Even though the conservative party establishment distrusts McCain I think they would be with him if things got tight and he was the only winner still available.
Third, I think he might be the only winner still available because Giuliani is fading fast. This is not just because of his (odd in the extreme) campaign strategy. It started back in November after the indictment of his friend and associate Bernie Kerik. Doubts about Giuliani's character have undermined him.
Fourth, I think (I think) McCain will win in South Carolina. This will bring renewed momentum and dish Mike Huckabee.
McCain was not a very good frontrunner. But this is not a long campaign. I think his momentum may last this time.
I said that new theories on the Clinton victory would continue to pop up. So here's a seventh - the McCain theory.
With all the fuss about Barack Obama it was easy to forget the other bandwagon rolling in New Hampshire - that of John McCain.
I observed the other day that Obama's Iowa victory might be bad news for McCain because Obama would attract the independents who have powered McCain in the past.
I didn't think to note that the obverse was also true - that McCain's emerging campaign threatened Obama.
Now, it seems as though that is a very good explanation of what happened. Here's what Ben Smith's Democrat watching blog suggests: Preliminary exit poll results indicate that just over four in 10 voters in the New Hampshire Democratic primary are independents, compared with 48 percent in 2004 and a record 50 percent in 1992.
In the Republican primary, preliminary results indicate again that about four in 10 are independents, similar to the previous high of 42 percent in 2000.
The McCain bandwagon can be ignored no longer.
 He's escaped a fiery plane, endured torture and survived five-and-a-half-years as a POW. Quite a resume for James Bond, let alone a presidential candidate.
But for John McCain, there's always room for improvement. His next goal? Taking on 007 duties as well. According to The Trail, he announced this weekend that if he wins the presidential race, he'll get rid of his security detail. It's my intention, if we win this nomination, to reject Secret Service," he said during one of his many conversations with reporters on his Straight Talk Express this weekend. "Why do I need it?"
He adds: "The day that the Secret Service can assure me that if we're driving in the motorcade and there's a guy in a rooftop with a rifle, that they can stop that guy, then I'll say fine. But the day they tell me, 'well, we can't guarantee it,' then fine, I'll take my chances."
Delusional? Perhaps. But I'd certainly rate his chances considerably higher than those of John Edwards.
Alice Fishburn
Jay Cost responds to my posts about a potential McCain revival.
Does he think it's possible that McCain can come back? He does.
Late last week I asked - is McCain really over? Now Stephen Hayes goes to New Hampshire with the Senator and after fighting his way through crowds (though mainly crowds of media) says this: At dinner the night before, McCain told me this debate would be the most important one yet. Then he won it in decisive fashion, with steady answers that demonstrated the leadership qualities McCain talks about on the campaign trail.
As it happens, that wasn't an accident. Before the debate, Mark Salter, McCain's longtime aide, gave the senator the same advice given young journalists: Show, don't tell. Salter told McCain he should spend less time telling people that he is a strong leader and more time showing them. It worked.
It is far too early to start writing the McCain comeback narrative. But it is equally early to be writing his political epitaph.
So let me try another bit of speculation.
In the 2004 election John Kerry (whose early primary comeback McCain would like to emulate) approached McCain and asked him to be his running mate. McCain rebuffed him.
How about McCain himself trying this trick. Today, he has written a Wall Street Journal piece with Joe Lieberman. Could he ask Lieberman to be on the ticket with him?
He can't choose a running mate before winning the nomination, you say? Remember Richard Schweiker by any chance? He was the liberal Republican named as running mate by Ronald Reagan during his 1976 campaign. So it can be done. And if McCain tries the orthodox route he really is finished. He's proved that already.
In case you don't get time to read Republican guru Peggy Noonan today (she's writing about the latest candidate debate), this was funny and interesting: John McCain seems liberated by loss. Once he was the front-runner, then he was over. Unburdened by the pressure to do well, he has rediscovered the pleasures of the trail. The other day when a student was impertinent, he pleasantly responded, "Thanks for the question, you little jerk."
It reminded me of the time Mayor Rudy Giuliani told an insistent radio caller who pressed for the legalization of ferrets that he probably cared about the issue because he was insane.
It's a long shot, I grant, but it does make me wonder whether it's really over for McCain. He is ill-suited to being a front runner but makes a brilliant insurgent. Circumstances have forced him back into that role.
When you look at the Republican race and see Rudy Giuliani out in front, you have to calculate that there is at least one shock out there before we get to convention time.
Why not a resurgent McCain?
Now Jay Cost argues that being a moderate can work in the primaries but that being a maverick doesn't. Voters need a swift way of understanding what a candidate stands for. They haven't time for a maverick.
That's true unless Republican voters are actually looking for unpredictability, surprise, excitement, being different. Being a maverick may be a poor shorthand description if you're trying to pin down the candidates, but it is a good shorthand for unpredictable excitement.
Is it so impossible to believe that Republicans arrive in the Spring dissatisfied with their front-runners and pessimistic about victory and conclude that a gamble might be worth it.
I know, I know. But I'm just saying it could happen.
With which US Presidential candidate do you agree most closely?
Exciting news - you are only minutes away from finding out.
All you have to do is click on the candidate calculator and take the short and simple test.
Me? I'm an 81.25 per cent match with John McCain. And an 70.80 per cent match with Rudy Giuliani.
But pure policy isn't everything. As I explain in my 10 reasons why it has to be Giuliani not McCain.
When Jay Cost's 2004 Horse Race Blog came to an end after the last presidential election, and the student went back to his studies, I was sufficiently disappointed that I wrote to him, urging him to continue.
It seems that I was not the only one, and now Jay's blog has resumed and is being hosted by Real Clear Politics. You can find the new Horse Race Blog here.
Jay's speciality is the use of data analysis and political science to illuminate politics. As you might expect, I find his approach very attractive.
His two recent posts on John McCain, for instance, are the very best writing on the subject that I have read. And believe me, I've read a lot of it.
I'll try and summarise what Jay has to say about candidate McCain's failing campaign.
The idea that McCain is having problems simply because he is a moderate Republican, is, Cost says, naive.
Yes, median voter theory suggests that in a two candidate election both should appeal to the median voter. And yes, the candidate who appeals to the median Republican voter won't necessarily appeal to the median general election voter. So the moderate Republican could win the Presidency if only they could get nominated. But they can't get nominated.
Ah, says Cost. But this is only if the nomination battle is between two candidates. And it isn't. In a multiple candidate election you don't all appeal to the median voter. A moderate can win.
McCain's problem is not so much that he is a moderate, it's that he's a maverick. Voters use simple labels to allow them to predict where a candidate stands on issues. This is of use when the voter hasn't studied everyone's position on everything or when a voter wants to know where the candidate will stand on some future question.
Cost argues that McCain's maverick positioning deprives voters and donors of essential knowledge about him. They can't work out who he is or what he is going to do. So they won't back him.
Costs' view on McCain are posted here and here. I'll be following his blog carefully in the run-up to 2008. I advise you to do the same.
 Whatever you think of the Iraq War, you just have to be impressed by John McCain’s cojones by going on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, in front of a vehemently anti-war crowd and host, to argue in favour of the Surge.
You should watch the interview in full by clicking on the two videos below. It’ll give you a good understanding of why he’s already in trouble in the race for the 2008 presidential election.
His stance means he’s being bashed by both sides over Iraq. Twack - Democrats attack McCain for supporting the War. Twack - Republicans attack him for then criticising the Bush Administration’s mismanagement of the War. Twack – Democrats bash him again for supporting the Surge, as that identifies him with the Bush Administration.
McCain’s noble attempt to keep a principled middle course on the War has meant that he’s seen on the wrong side of the argument by almost everyone.
McCain argues, like this article on the Foreign Policy website, that now the Surge has begun, it has to work, and setting a withdrawal date (as the Democrats are currently trying to do) would undermine it. After reading Bob Woodward’s excellent book, State of Denial, my own feeling is that this conflict was lost by the mistakes made in the first year of the invasion – and that the Surge may be too little too late. I hope I’m wrong. Murad Ahmed
Big news everyone. John McCain is officially running for President! Calm down, I know that will come as shock, but the Straight Talk Express has left the station.
To be honest, I had an inkling he was going to announce yesterday, after a friend sent me this video by the McCain "I might be running" campaign. It's all very professionally made, much sharper than our party political broadcasts. I particularly like the Jazz piano which plays during the clip - it made me feel like I was watching a trailer for a romantic comedy.
But bizarrely, the preview freeze-frame of the video reads: At least you can get a free bowl of chilli
Not very professional. If it tickles your fancy, watch the video below.
Murad Ahmed
Is "The Surge" working? John McCain thinks that it is: I just returned from my fifth visit to Iraq since 2003 -- and my first since Gen. David Petraeus's new strategy has started taking effect. For the first time, our delegation was able to drive, not use helicopters, from the airport to downtown Baghdad. For the first time, we met with Sunni tribal leaders in Anbar province who are working with American and Iraqi forces to combat al-Qaeda. For the first time, we visited Iraqi and American forces deployed in a joint security station in Baghdad -- an integral part of the new strategy. We held a news conference to discuss what we saw: positive signs, underreported in the United States, that are reason for cautious optimism.
And he is echoing an argument made by Robert Kagan in the same newspaper a month ago: Though it is still early and horrible acts of violence continue, there is substantial evidence that the new counterinsurgency strategy, backed by the infusion of new forces, is having a significant effect.
Are they right? I hope so. But optimism is hard, given all that's happened.
I like Senator John McCain, really I do. I think he is often brave and often right. I like his style. But, well, Rudy is Rudy.
Here are the ten reasons why it has to be the Mayor not the Senator:
1. He's been a Mayor, not a Senator. Giuliani's an executive kind of guy, not a legislator. That gives him the skills to be President.
2. He's been a Mayor, not a Senator. Senators talk an obscure legislator's language that loses elections. All other things being equal, the Republicans are more likely to win with a candidate from outside the Senate.
3. Age. By the time of the next election Giuliani will be 64. McCain will be 72. That's too old. And increasingly, he looks his age. This will be an issue.
4. Charisma. McCain is loved by journalists, who find him charming. But strangely, he can be rather boring on the stump. Giuliani is not a natural orator but he is good enough and he has great authority and presence.
5. Agenda. Both McCain and Giuliani hold out the promise of a new kind of Republican message - one that goes beyond traditional small government conservatism. They are both advocates of free markets and limited government, but see the need to have more to say about the things that concern middle class voters. McCain's talk of duty and sacrifice is attractive rhetorically, but is, in the end, a bit wooly. What does it all mean? Rudy gets to the point on issues like crime, tax, welfare and education.
6. Relationship with the Republican base. McCain has always had a difficult time with the Republican base. As a result he feels he has to make peace with the grassroots in order to win the nomination. Rudy should, theoretically, have the same problems, given his views on issues like abortion and gay rights. But somehow his status as a Republican hero has allowed him to escape McCain's problems. He can win over social conservatives by talking about issues like school choice. I think he is much less likely to be force to tack away from the centre in order to conciliate the base. This gives him a better chance of winning.
7. Tetchiness. They're both tetchy. McCain's tetchiness is more of a political liability.
8. Independence. The Republican candidate will have a hard time in this election. Rudy will find it easier to sell himself as independent and win support from those who didn't back the Republicans in the midterms. And in office he might find it easier to appeal across parties.
9. The record: Giuliani's record on crime is a very strong card for him to play.
10. Bigness. This isn't a scientific point, I know, but while they are both big figures, somehow Rudy is bigger. He can appeal to the centre and the right in a campaign but in the Oval Office you sense he'd take tough decisions and sell them.
So, with it all, between McCain and Giuliani... it's got to be Rudy.
In this week's Economist, the magazine notes that the Republican Party is ceasing to be a national party - like the Conservative Party in Britain it speaks with a Southern accent. Can such a Party win a national election?
Michael Barone, one of the premier electoral experts in the US, considers the party's options. Using early polling, he suggests that while a McCain candidacy may win more of the popular vote, a Giuliani might do better in the electoral college. The reason? Because he will do more to win the northeast.
A Giuliani candidacy might also change the contours of conservatism - making it more socially liberal while retaining its tough-minded attitude on welfare, crime and the war on terror.
I would find this combination attractive but, last I heard, they weren't holding a Republican primary in Pinner. I don't think Republican primary voters in Texas see things in quite the same way as we do in Hatch End Alpine Dry Cleaners.
What I know for certain is this - if the Republicans think that just anyone can beat Hillary they are badly, badly mistaken.
John McCain's visit to next week's Conservative party conference is certainly an improvement on days gone by.
At one conference during my period at Conservative Central office, the Labour Party was addressed by Nelson Mandela. We had Ed "Stewpot" Stewart.
Daniel Finkelstein
is Chief Leader Writer of The Times and writes a weekly column. Comment Central is his rolling guide to the best opinion on the web. Click
here for more information on the blog. Alice Fishburn, the Online Comment Editor, will also be posting.
Send us an E-Mail
|
His mother may be queen of the actual highway but John McCain has run into some difficulties on the information equivalent. The Huffington Post recently posted a video in which he confessed to being technologically challenged.
